The Tea Party and today's right-wing libertarian movements are built on several premises or assumptions. Within limits, most of those are true. But the problem is that those current movements do not accept reasonable limits. Among those premises or assumptions are the following:
You've done a good job outlining the limitations of Libertarianism. Many in the Liberatarian camp reference Ayn Rand and the Objectivism movement as their guide posts. Most do not understand human nature, or Ayn Rand for that matter.
Ayn Rand was writiing out of her experiences in Soviet Russia. As such she wrote in a polar extreme to the failing Communist system she fled. I did an independent study on her and her philosophies in college many years ago.
The problem lies in the fact most proponents of Objectivism and Libertarianism today are writing or espousing without to benefit of the same experiential base or context. They are grabbing onto a surficial undetstanding of what Rand meant by selfishness.
Todays Libertarianism is primarily a clarion call for superselfishness. It is principally a way to achieve two objectives:
Preserve white male (primarily) privilige. The idea that basically says that nobody can tell me who I have to accept, what I can do, or that I need to be accountable to anybody besides myself (they just don't want to called into account for their actions or be responsible for contributing to the larger community):
They are generally immature and recoil when they are told they have to contribute to society or provide assistance to anybody besides themselves. They are the type that were continually in trouble in school because they were convinced that nobody could tell them what to do.
Libertarianism is indeed a selfish minor philosophy, but not in the way that is consistent with Ayn Rand's experiences or intent. The above discriptions are indeed generalizations, but are anecdotally consistent with my observations and experiences.
,